Maha Yahya writes:

Iran, Israel, the United States, and the Arab Gulf countries have all spent decades trying to shape the region to their liking without addressing the root causes of conflict, and they have repeatedly failed. They have sought security over peace and ended up with neither. And yet their current plans are strikingly similar, at least in spirit, to past efforts. All these countries are committing again to visions of a new regional order in which reconstruction takes place without political settlements. They have put forth lofty proposals—Israeli-Saudi normalization, an economic pact between Iran and the Gulf states—without considering political realities, local dynamics, or other, broader consequences. As a result, their plans will not put an end to cyclical violence. If anything, they will fuel it.

To achieve stability, the war-torn Middle East must shift course. Its powers must stop papering over regional and local divisions and instead do the hard work of addressing them. They need to help fractured societies come together. They must create accountable political institutions and promote systems of transitional justice. They need to support a reconstruction that is part of a broader peace-building agenda. They must create a political framework that actually recognizes the right of Palestinians to self-determination. And they need to figure out how to resolve, or at least better manage, their own differences. Otherwise, it doesn’t matter how much the world spends on reconstruction. The region will remain broken.

In 1945, Europe lay in ruins. Tens of millions of people had been killed in six years of war. Millions more had been driven from their homes. Many of the continent’s most prosperous cities had been demolished by bombs or shattered by artillery. Regional currencies had collapsed, reducing people to begging and bartering.

In response, the Truman administration called on Washington to dedicate itself to rebuilding the continent. Following the advice of U.S. Secretary of State George Marshall, Congress began passing massive aid packages for Europe’s peoples and communities, spending $13.3 billion (over $170 billion in today’s dollars) on the region. But this money came with conditions. Recipients had to remove most barriers to trade with other European states. They had to adopt policies that increased their exports to the United States and made them take in more American goods. The goal was not merely to reconstruct Europe’s homes, roads, and bridges. It was to bring the continent into the emerging U.S.-led liberal order.

The strategy worked. The recipients of Marshall Plan funds joined the U.S.-led North Atlantic Treaty Organization, committing to collective defense. They enmeshed their economies, paving the way for the European Union. Thanks to these decisions, Europe not only economically recovered from the destruction of World War II but, after centuries of fighting, became one of the world’s most peaceful and prosperous regions.

The scale of devastation across the Middle East today resembles that of Europe in 1945. The death tolls are staggering, if not quite as high. Entire economies have been wiped out. National currencies have lost most of their value: the Yemeni riyal has lost 80 percent of its value since 2014. The damage is most visible in Gaza, where, as of late January, the official death toll is over 47,000—likely an underestimate—and where Israeli bombardment reduced around 70 percent of its buildings to rubble in a little over a year. (The UN has projected that it will take more than a decade just to remove the wreckage.) But other countries have suffered similar losses. The 14-year Syrian civil war displaced 12 million people and killed over 600,000; over 90 percent of the country’s residents now live below the international poverty line. In Yemen, more than half the population is now impoverished. Nearly 20 million people there need direct humanitarian assistance. Economic mismanagement and predatory practices have further contributed to economic decline, especially in Egypt, Iraq, and Lebanon.

The Middle East needs a Marshall Plan. But unlike in post–World War II Europe, no country is stepping up. There is no single champion for the region, and there is no consensus on how to bring the area out of its quagmire. On the contrary, the Middle East is plagued by disunity and rivalry. The only thing the various American, Iranian, Israeli, Turkish, and Gulf proposals have in common is that they neglect fundamental challenges. [Continue reading…]